Two more neutrino theories.

Here’s the professional one.

Now my amateur hypothesis.  We know the speed of light decreases in greater mass densities.  That’s why there’s Cerenkov radiation.  Beta particles underwater are emitted with enough energy to exceed the speed of light in that medium.  With sufficient energy they would emit Cerenkov in air.

But electrons have several mechanisms to shed energy.  But apart from being absorbed, I’m unaware of any other neutrino interaction.

So suppose neutrinos propagate at the speed of light in a pure vacuum?  Or at least very very very close to c-speed?  If I had the math, I’d calculate whether that 60 nanoseconds FTL flight corresponds to the difference in lightspeed between travelling through the intervening medium and passing through a perfect vacuum.

What do you think?  Is it at least plausible enough to email a revelent expert?

About wormme

I've accepted that all of you are socially superior to me. But no pretending that any of you are rational.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Two more neutrino theories.

  1. MG says:

    So, to rephrase:
    That the environment of the test chamber was ‘sympathetic’ to measuring the speed of the neutrino?
    And allowed measuring it, as some others have been, as technically FTL; but explicably so?

    That what you’re saying?

  2. Mountainbear says:

    The moment I heard that they fired those neutrinos through solid rock the first thing that popped into my mind was: speed of sound.

    Speed of sound in the air is 300-something. You all know it anyway and I’m too hangover to remember and too lazy to look it up. Speed of sound in water is higher. In metal even higher. Depends on the density. I wouldn’t be surprised if speed of light worked similar, especially with neutrinos.

    Plus, I’ve seen so many people go on about how that experiment invalidates Einstein’s relativity and stuff. Some even going on about space AND time travel. Gotta love people showing off how dumb they are, cause Einstein’s stuff is based on the concept of the speed of light being a universal constant in the VACUUM. D’oh. Solid rock isn’t really what I call “vacuum”. Might be a completely intolerant and conservative view, but…

    • wormme says:

      I’ve never really understood the higher mass density/lower light speed thing. Physicists also tell us that gravity doesn’t affect light speed. If a photon escapes a near-black hole, it doesn’t travel any slower. It loses energy and increases in wavelength.

      But anyway. If this is correct, you had a bead on the answer long before I did.

      • Mountainbear says:

        But from my understanding gravity, when reaching a certain point, affects even the speed of light. Nothing escapes a real black hole, not even light.

  3. D.J. says:

    I had a similar thought. On second thought, though, they may well have been calculating transit time based on c without thought for medium density…after all, neutrinos aren’t really supposed to interact with matter, so it shouldn’t effect the speed they travel at, right?

    The GPS observation theory has the benefits of a) not being obvious enough to jump out at the first get-go, b) explainable by current theory.

    But go ahead! Get this theory out there! Even if it’s shot down, science progresses because we know more truth than we did before.

Leave a Reply to Mountainbear Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s